Zune says there is no choice, says J Allard

Saturday 16 September 2006 09.11 EDT
First published on Saturday 16 September 2006 09.11 EDT

Engadget got an interview with J Allard, the man behind both Zune and the Xbox, and tried to pin him down on Plays For Sure. The gist of it is that Plays For Sure is (by Microsoft standards) an open system while Zune is a closed system -- basically it's Microsoft's copy of Apple's iPod model.

Plays For Sure promises compatibility between different MP3 players from different manufacturers and music from different libraries, if they all use Microsoft's WMA music format and digital rights management (DRM). In other words, it's an openly-licensed multivendor platform, like Windows.

But, Allard says: "Other people just a want a system that's end-to-end -- all compatible out of the gate -- and that's what Zune does. Zune says there is no choice; you get a Zune device, you hook it up to the Zune service, and it just works." In other words, that's essentially a single-vendor-controlled platform, like the Xbox (and like Nintendo and Sony games consoles), and Apple's iPod business. Allard adds:

That [compatibility] continues to be the premise for devices that are branded in that category [Plays For Sure], and we think that we've clearly done a lot in that program, where there's a lot of devices out there, there are a lot of services out there, there are a lot of partners, and there are a lot of satisfied customers. We like that program. We've also found that there's a category of customers that say, "Give me a brand experience, advertise it to me on television; I want to be part of the digital music revolution, and that solution [Plays For Sure] doesn't work for me." So they're two complementary solutions -- not everyone's gonna want Zune and not everyone's gonna want Plays For Sure. They're different paths there, and we're okay with both of them.

Comment: Allard's right, they are complementary for Microsoft. It can afford to try both systems. But they are not complementary for Creative, Samsung, Toshiba, Sony etc, or for Urge, Napster 2 and other music libraries. They are locked out of Zune in just the same way as they are locked out of the iPod/iTunes Music Store business, and therefore now face increased competition from the company that signed them up as partners. I'll be amazed if they don't feel they've been stabbed in the back.

Microsoft may be managing things behind the scenes so that these firms are not likely to revolt, because current partners are all potential suppliers. For example, Toshiba might be happy if Zune-badged Gigabeat players sell millions more than Toshiba-badged Gigabeat players. But it's still not an open, competitive market.

On the other hand, what choice do they have? If we go by the proprietary games business, there is probably not a market for more than three systems, and Apple already owns one of them. If the other two are Zune, Real Media or Sony's struggling Connect system, that leaves several thousand potential device manufacturers and several dozen potential online music services with nowhere else to go....

Well, there are several possibilities. First, everyone could do the really smart thing and abandon the stupidity of DRM. Second, Apple could do the really smart thing and start licensing FairPlay, to create a platform like Windows. Third, everyone else could get together, pool their resources and agree to license a common platform via an industry association, on the model of the DVD Forum.

However, the first would require a total reversal of music industry policy, which is currently shameless and greedy enough to sue children for file sharing. eMusic shows it's possible, but it's still unlikely.

The second would require Steve Jobs to do a total reversal of his policy of controlling everything as tightly as possible, which may be more likely but don't hold your breath.

The third would be a good move but hard to pull off when the major players -- Apple, Sony and Microsoft -- all have proprietary systems. Also, associations have limited powers. For example, the DVD Forum agreed to extend DVD to create HD-DVD, but that didn't stop one of its members, Sony, from trying to take over the market with its own proprietary system.

It's still early days, of course. At the moment, you can get most things on CD then rip to an open lossless format such as FLAC, if you want. Nobody really needs to pay higher prices for lower quality, copy protected file downloads from proprietary online music stores. But what happens when all but the most mass market recordings, particularly of jazz and classical concerts, are never issued on CD in the first place?